In re the Matter of the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Donald B. Kronenberg

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court reviewed disciplinary charges against attorney Donald B. Kronenberg for bribing and tampering with a witness, deceiving prosecutors, and being unfit to practice law. The court affirmed the Disciplinary Board's findings and ordered Kronenberg disbarred, concluding that evidentiary errors involving hearsay and polygraph reports were harmless.

Holdings

1. The purported civil settlement was a ruse devised to bribe J.D. not to testify at Cotton's criminal trial and to conceal the bribe.
2. Admission of hearsay evidence under ELC 10.14(d)(1) does not inherently violate procedural due process where the evidence is the kind on which reasonably prudent persons are accustomed to rely in conducting their affairs.
3. Any error in admitting the disputed hearsay was harmless because the declarants testified and were subject to cross-examination, and the facts supported by the evidence were independently established by other evidence.
4. Polygraph evidence is inadmissible absent stipulation by both parties, and the reports in this case did not satisfy ELC 10.14(d)(1).
5. Admission of the polygraph reports was harmless because overwhelming evidence independently supported the hearing officer's findings.
6. Disbarment was the appropriate sanction for Kronenberg's intentional witness tampering, dishonesty, deception, and interference with the administration of justice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the hearing officer's findings that Kronenberg intended to bribe or tamper with J.D. and used a purported civil settlement as a pretext were supported by the record.
2. Whether admission of hearsay evidence under ELC 10.14(d)(1) violated Kronenberg's procedural due process rights.
3. Whether any error in admitting disputed hearsay evidence was harmless.
4. Whether polygraph reports were admissible under ELC 10.14(d)(1) and, if inadmissible, whether their admission was harmless.
5. Whether disbarment was the appropriate sanction for Kronenberg's witness tampering, dishonesty, and interference with the administration of justice.
6. Whether delay in bringing disciplinary charges, the absence of an interim suspension, lack of reoffending, or the absence of criminal prosecution required a lesser sanction.

Disposition

affirmed